Unfortunately I agree with your assumption. The entire lake front is a park and therefore is a prohibited place. Pretty ridiculous to me given the number of stories you hear every year regarding people getting attacked along the lake front.

Well, according to this map, the Chicago Park District claims just about the entirety of the lake front within the city limits. Only big exception is Navy Pier, and that is excluded as well. http://www.chicagopa...m/parks/search/

Well, according to this map, the Chicago Park District claims just about the entirety of the lake front within the city limits. Only big exception is Navy Pier, and that is excluded as well. http://www.chicagopa...m/parks/search/

What map? I just find a search function.

Edited by spec5, 16 April 2014 - 03:26 PM.

NRA Member Life Member
ISRA Member
Illinois Carry
Pershing Nuclear Missile 56th Field Artillery Brigade Veteran
1/41 Field Artillary Germany

The only public access to Lake Michigan in the City of Chicago is through property controlled by the Chicago Park District. Even the paved lakefront between North Avenue and Millenium Park is part of the Park District. Navy Pier is controlled by the Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, a municipal corporation, and carry is banned as governmental property and as an amusement park. The Lakefront Bike Trail would seem to be ok as it originates as a continuous designated trail outside the park system on both ends. Stopping to use the restrooms (or dismounting and leaving your bike for any reason) would put you in violation, so leave the park for that purpose.

They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it’s not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance

Still too many places that I pay with my taxes where I am denied my rights.

In Texas, it is my understanding that publicly funded places cannot be prohibited for the most part, because they are PUBLIC.

I can't carry 5 days of the week unless I drive to work. This GFZ needs to be nullified ASAP, the CTA is a tax black hole that happens to be unreliable, dirty and unsafe and requires me to leave my gun at home. I'm fully aware of getting around that with transport laws but how cumbersome is that:

-leave home with gun holstered

-walk 5 minutes to train stop

-secretly switch to transport mode, somehow

-ride train for 45 minutes

-Exit train and secretly reholster

-Walk for 5 minutes to my building's bathroom and secure gun for the day in suitcase

My building isn't posted but my company issued a memo prohibiting conceal carry which is fine, I'll respect that even if it doesn't have the force of law, I can have it within arms reach in a suitcase on my desk and no one has to know about it. However the fact that I can't carry on public transportation is why I don't bother with carrying daily, too much juggling around to stay legal.

I transport in my car M-F during working hours. Any other time I carry unless I know we are going somewhere prohibited. Then it's knife and pepper spray to hold me over.

I wonder how long and what it's going to take to shorten that GFZ list. If I ever get attacked on public transportation or in a park, my lawyer will have a field day.

It just blows my mind that many of the prohibited locations in our current carry law are places where one would need to carry most.

I guess that's just the anti-side coming through, that their logic is if we prohibit the lawful carriers from being able to properly defend themselves then somehow the criminals will stop committing crimes.

I guess that's just the anti-side coming through, that their logic is if we prohibit the lawful carriers from being able to properly defend themselves then somehow the criminals will stop committing crimes.

I believe that's referred to as "magical thinking", or "insanity".

They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it’s not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance

Lets talk about Parks in small cities for a moment. Our Chief of Police published a long article in the local paper yesterday. Mostly calm stuff, but at one point he stated that CCW holders would be arrested if they had a firearm in a vehicle in the city park. I thought that we have Safe Haven in our vehicles, such that when we drove into a parking lot of an otherwise prohibited place, that we could secure our pistol and be fine with regard to the law. Am I all wet or did he mis-speak?

Lets talk about Parks in small cities for a moment. Our Chief of Police published a long article in the local paper yesterday. Mostly calm stuff, but at one point he stated that CCW holders would be arrested if they had a firearm in a vehicle in the city park. I thought that we have Safe Haven in our vehicles, such that when we drove into a parking lot of an otherwise prohibited place, that we could secure our pistol and be fine with regard to the law. Am I all wet or did he mis-speak?

Your vehicle is a safe haven in EVERY prohibitted area EXCEPT Nuclear facilities and places where firearms are banned per federal law.

That is exactly the training that I had. I will approach him and try to determine if he just lost his train of thought or got a mite bewildered for a moment. Maybe he got left out of the training video for the Police, who knows!

(3) Any building, parking area, or portion of a building under the control of an officer of the executive or legislative branch of government, provided that nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit a licensee from carrying a concealed firearm onto the real property, bikeway, or trail in a park regulated by the Department of Natural Resources or any other designated public hunting area or building where firearm possession is permitted as established by the Department of Natural Resources under Section 1.8 of the Wildlife Code.

Anyone know where clear guidance on this prohibition can be found? Thanks.

You will have to find out from someone if the parking lot is a posted location under title 18. If it is not posted you will be fine in your vehicle.
I have no doubt the building will be posted in accordance with title 18.

[c] A licensee shall not be in violation of this Section while he or she is traveling along a public right of way that touches or crosses any of the premises under subsection (a), (a-5), or (a-10) of this Section if the concealed firearm is carried on his or her person in accordance with the provisions of this Act or is being transported in a vehicle by the licensee in accordance with all other applicable provisions of law.

Almost all of the Lakefront Park consists of public right of way. I think that as long as you are walking along, and not entering into a building you are legal.

[c] A licensee shall not be in violation of this Section while he or she is traveling along a public right of way that touches or crosses any of the premises under subsection (a), (a-5), or (a-10) of this Section if the concealed firearm is carried on his or her person in accordance with the provisions of this Act or is being transported in a vehicle by the licensee in accordance with all other applicable provisions of law.

Almost all of the Lakefront Park consists of public right of way. I think that as long as you are walking along, and not entering into a building you are legal.

Ooh. Be careful with this: "public right of way" is generally used in reference to roads and highways. Given the typical Chicago politician/police officer/Cook County Sheriff's views on this subject, I would be afraid of becoming a test case.

[c] A licensee shall not be in violation of this Section while he or she is traveling along a public right of way that touches or crosses any of the premises under subsection (a), (a-5), or (a-10) of this Section if the concealed firearm is carried on his or her person in accordance with the provisions of this Act or is being transported in a vehicle by the licensee in accordance with all other applicable provisions of law.

Almost all of the Lakefront Park consists of public right of way. I think that as long as you are walking along, and not entering into a building you are legal.

Ooh. Be careful with this: "public right of way" is generally used in reference to roads and highways. Given the typical Chicago politician/police officer/Cook County Sheriff's views on this subject, I would be afraid of becoming a test case.

This ^

The lakefront park system consists of a series of city parks (one of the 23 categories of prohibited places) that are joined. The beachfront access is part of the parks, as are the pedestrian paths and bikeways. While there are streets that pass through the parks at various points, and there are driveways that lead to and from parking areas, there are no public rights of way IN the parks. As a practical example look at the "Park Closes at..." signs, which indicate that public presence is prohibited between certain hours. Not possible on a public right of way.

They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it’s not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance

[c] A licensee shall not be in violation of this Section while he or she is traveling along a public right of way that touches or crosses any of the premises under subsection (a), (a-5), or (a-10) of this Section if the concealed firearm is carried on his or her person in accordance with the provisions of this Act or is being transported in a vehicle by the licensee in accordance with all other applicable provisions of law.

Almost all of the Lakefront Park consists of public right of way. I think that as long as you are walking along, and not entering into a building you are legal.

Ooh. Be careful with this: "public right of way" is generally used in reference to roads and highways. Given the typical Chicago politician/police officer/Cook County Sheriff's views on this subject, I would be afraid of becoming a test case.

A lot of the definitions of "public right of way" that I find on the internet include the term "path" and since Section 65 c references "a concealed firearm carried on his or her person" as well as in a vehicle it seems to contemplate walking as well as driving. Most of us don't walk on a road or highway so side walks and paths that cross prohibited areas must be included.

Don't know if this helps, but here's one Illinois definition of public right of way from HB1480...

"Public right of way" means that portion of the highway or
street adjacent to the roadway for accommodating stopped
vehicles or for emergency use; or that portion of a street
between the curb lines, or the lateral lines of a roadway, and the adjacent property lines.

2) Any building, real property, and parking area under the control of a pre-school or child care facility, including any room or portion of a building under the control of a pre-school or child care facility. Nothing in this paragraph shall prevent the operator of a child care facility in a family home from owning or possessing a firearm in the home or license under this Act, if no child under child care at the home is present in the home or the firearm in the home is stored in a locked container when a child under child care at the home is present in the home.

What constitutes a "child care facility"? Someone I know works for an after school program like Sylvan's (no, it is not Sylvan's, but one of its competitors). It is not a child care center per se, but it is a private after school tutoring center. Would she be permitted to carry her firearm there?